OT: 0.0.0.0

One domain is advertising an MX record of "0.0.0.0" which postfix correctly reports as "numeric domain name in resource data of MX record for ..." Then (on Linux at least), Postfix connects to "0.0.0.0" and then logs a couple of messages complaining it is trying to talk to itself. I'm not sure

Re: Auto blacklist email addresses

Zitat von "Josep M." : Hello. One spammer has tried about 300 times send me email, always from the same address, but from about 20 different IP . Never pass verify sender, always get 450 errormy question is...when one email fail postfix verify_sender 4 or 5 times..will be possible auto-bla

Re: Directing SPAM mail to a Junk Folder

Hi rob0, It works... Thanks for your support. Regards Indrajith On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 07:45:52 -0500 /dev/rob0 wrote: Please don't top-post replies. Also note, I set Reply-To: to keep discussions on list. I do not want a CC:. On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 06:03:47AM +0530, Chaminda Indrajith wrote:

Re: Rate control for SMTP delivery to speicific domain

Mike Hutchinson: > > > > > > smtphotmail unix - - - - 3 > > smtp > > > > Who told you to set a wakeup timer of 3 seconds? Remove it. > > No-one did. I had intended to set a max processes limit.. You're right. Hoewever, with smtphotmail...rate_delay, Postfix will

Re: OT: 0.0.0.0

Simon Waters: > One domain is advertising an MX record of "0.0.0.0" which postfix correctly > reports as "numeric domain name in resource data of MX record for ..." > > Then (on Linux at least), Postfix connects to "0.0.0.0" and then logs a > couple > of messages complaining it is trying to tal

Bypassing content filter or mail filter if one of them crashes out

Hello, I am running my postfix with 3 mail filters and 2 content filters (actually one of the content filter (amavisd) is piping it's output to the other). My question here is how can I make sure to make my setup robust in the sense that if one of the mail filter or content filter crashes then

Re: Bypassing content filter or mail filter if one of them crashes out

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 02:41:40PM +, Sharma, Ashish wrote: > Hello, > > I am running my postfix with 3 mail filters and 2 content filters (actually > one of the content filter (amavisd) is piping it's output to the other). > > My question here is how can I make sure to make my setup robust

Proper setup of our postfix relays

Hello There! I have looked around the net for an answer to this with no luck. Our company has a pair of Postfix relays that relay mail in and out of our network. We use an outside email service for email archiving, and this requires all the mail to be sent through the service. We can not just

Re: Proper setup of our postfix relays

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:52:28PM -0400, Jon Giles wrote: > So I set this up in the main.cf file. > > relay_domains = maildomain1 maildomain2 maildomain3 > relayhost = to the DNS name of the email archiving service > fallback_relay = to the second DNS name of the email archiving service DO NOT

Re: Proper setup of our postfix relays

Very good. Thanks very much for the help! jg On 3/30/10 1:06 PM, "Victor Duchovni" wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:52:28PM -0400, Jon Giles wrote: > >> So I set this up in the main.cf file. >> >> relay_domains = maildomain1 maildomain2 maildomain3 >> relayhost = to the DNS name of the emai

Re: Bypassing content filter or mail filter if one of them crashes out

On 3/30/2010 9:41 AM, Sharma, Ashish wrote: Hello, I am running my postfix with 3 mail filters and 2 content filters (actually one of the content filter (amavisd) is piping it's output to the other). My question here is how can I make sure to make my setup robust in the sense that if one of

RE: Rate control for SMTP delivery to speicific domain

> -Original Message- > From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix- > us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Sahil Tandon > Sent: Tuesday, 30 March 2010 3:07 p.m. > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Rate control for SMTP delivery to speicific domain > > On Tue, 30 Mar

BCC to Undisclosed-Recipient

Hi There, I must have something a little wrong with my postfix config?? When someone sends a email to me as part of a BCC email (leaving the TO field blank) the TO field comes up as - To: <"Undisclosed-Recipient:;"@ mail-in1.ourdomain.com>. Any idea on what i have incorrect or how to fix this wo

Re: BCC to Undisclosed-Recipient

On 3/30/2010 2:40 PM, Simon wrote: Hi There, I must have something a little wrong with my postfix config?? When someone sends a email to me as part of a BCC email (leaving the TO field blank) the TO field comes up as - To: <"Undisclosed-Recipient:;"@mail-in1.ourdomain.com

lots of lost connections

I moved our company over to postfix (v2.6.2) last Friday and have been mesmerized by the log. One thing I'm seeing is a lot of 'lost connections from unknown[ IP ]'. I'm hoping that these are due to either poorly written spambots bailing early or smtpd_recipient_restrictions rejecting the connec

Re: Rate control for SMTP delivery to speicific domain

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 08:16:28AM +1300, Mike Hutchinson wrote: > > What version of Postfix is this? > > Postfix mail_version = 2.5.1 The rate control features introduced in 2.5.0 were improved in later patches, you must upgrade to the latest 2.5 release if you want to enforce inter-message del

Re: Rate control for SMTP delivery to speicific domain

On 3/30/2010 2:16 PM, Mike Hutchinson wrote: -Original Message- From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix- us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Sahil Tandon Sent: Tuesday, 30 March 2010 3:07 p.m. To: postfix-users@postfix.org Subject: Re: Rate control for SMTP delivery to

Re: Rate control for SMTP delivery to speicific domain

Victor Duchovni: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 08:16:28AM +1300, Mike Hutchinson wrote: > > > > What version of Postfix is this? > > > > Postfix mail_version = 2.5.1 > > The rate control features introduced in 2.5.0 were improved in later > patches, you must upgrade to the latest 2.5 release if you

Re: Rate control for SMTP delivery to speicific domain

On Mar 30, 2010, at 3:16 PM, "Mike Hutchinson" wrote: -Original Message- From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix- us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Sahil Tandon Sent: Tuesday, 30 March 2010 3:07 p.m. To: postfix-users@postfix.org Subject: Re: Rate control for SMTP

Re: BCC to Undisclosed-Recipient

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Noel Jones wrote: > On 3/30/2010 2:40 PM, Simon wrote: > >> Any idea on what i have incorrect or how to fix this would be greatly >> appeciated! >> >> > What do you think is should say? > > Have you looked at > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#undisclosed_re

Re: lots of lost connections

On 3/30/2010 2:46 PM, Terry Barnum wrote: I moved our company over to postfix (v2.6.2) last Friday and have been mesmerized by the log. One thing I'm seeing is a lot of 'lost connections from unknown[ IP ]'. I'm hoping that these are due to either poorly written spambots bailing early or smtpd

Re: BCC to Undisclosed-Recipient

On 3/30/2010 3:25 PM, Simon wrote: On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Noel Jones mailto:njo...@megan.vbhcs.org>> wrote: On 3/30/2010 2:40 PM, Simon wrote: Any idea on what i have incorrect or how to fix this would be greatly appeciated! What do you think is sho

RE: Rate control for SMTP delivery to speicific domain

> > > > What version of Postfix is this? > > > > Postfix mail_version = 2.5.1 > > The rate control features introduced in 2.5.0 were improved in later > patches, you must upgrade to the latest 2.5 release if you want to > enforce inter-message delays. > Sounds interesting. I shall investigate a

RE: Rate control for SMTP delivery to speicific domain

> > > >>> And setting the wakeup timer would be like this: > >>> smtphotmail unix- - - 3 - smtp > >> > >> That is how you set the timer. > > > > Yes, not what I am doing / want to do. > > > >>> My apologies. Ill go back and start from scratch. > >> > >> What

RE: Rate control for SMTP delivery to speicific domain

> >> > >> What version of Postfix is this? > > > > Postfix mail_version = 2.5.1 > > That's what I suspected. Upgrade; see RELEASE_NOTES for > destination_rate_delay fix last year. Also show logs confirming your > special transport is actually being used. Excellent. Sounds like I have my answer.

Re: lots of lost connections

On Mar 30, 2010, at 1:26 PM, Noel Jones wrote: > On 3/30/2010 2:46 PM, Terry Barnum wrote: >> I moved our company over to postfix (v2.6.2) last Friday and have been >> mesmerized by the log. One thing I'm seeing is a lot of 'lost connections >> from unknown[ IP ]'. I'm hoping that these are due

Re: lots of lost connections

On Mar 30, 2010, at 2:08 PM, Terry Barnum wrote: On Mar 30, 2010, at 1:26 PM, Noel Jones wrote: > On 3/30/2010 2:46 PM, Terry Barnum wrote: >> I moved our company over to postfix (v2.6.2) last Friday and have been >> mesmerized by the log. One thing I'm seeing is a lot of 'lost connections >>

Re: lots of lost connections

On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:13:27 -0700 Terry Barnum wrote: > Other ideas why those clients didn't get rejected before DATA? ESMTP Pipelining? They could very well be rejected before DATA, except, well, with pipelining they may have already started sending the message. (There are quite a few spam c

Re: lots of lost connections

On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Terry Barnum wrote: > >> $ grep 'lost connection' /var/log/mail.log > >> > >> Mar 30 05:07:14 mail postfix/smtpd[45236]: lost connection after DATA from > >> unknown[123.28.125.3] > >> Mar 30 05:07:17 mail postfix/smtpd[45244]: lost connection after DATA from > >> unknown[6

Re: lots of lost connections

On Mar 30, 2010, at 3:05 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote: > On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Terry Barnum wrote: > $ grep 'lost connection' /var/log/mail.log Mar 30 05:07:14 mail postfix/smtpd[45236]: lost connection after DATA from unknown[123.28.125.3] Mar 30 05:07:17 mail postfix/smtpd[4

Re: lots of lost connections

On Mar 30, 2010, at 3:05 PM, brian moore wrote: > On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:13:27 -0700 > Terry Barnum wrote: > >> Other ideas why those clients didn't get rejected before DATA? > > ESMTP Pipelining? > > They could very well be rejected before DATA, except, well, with pipelining > they may have

TLS library problem

Sorry about the flurry of questions today, I'm still getting my feet wet with postfix. pflogsumm pointed out these three warnings about TLS: Mar 28 04:47:54 mail postfix/smtpd[22135]: warning: TLS library problem: 22135:error:140760FC:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_CLIENT_HELLO:unknown protocol:s23_sr

Re: TLS library problem

On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Terry Barnum wrote: > Mar 28 04:47:54 mail postfix/smtpd[22135]: warning: TLS library problem: > 22135:error:140760FC:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_CLIENT_HELLO:unknown > protocol:s23_srvr.c:578: > Mar 29 15:12:39 mail postfix/smtpd[35073]: warning: TLS library problem: > 35073:er

smtpd-policyd feature.

Dear List, We are using the smtpd-policyd feature from long time to allow some specific users to receive higher size mails. It is working fine. But, it does not work when the recipient_count is more than one as we are comparing the value with recipient. There has been lot of development